Bishops ouer the Priests All which yet we doe acknowledge in a peaceable and flourishing estate of the Church ought to be had And we haue cause to praise God for our happinesse in England aboue other Churches in this behalfe M. Euerard Here M. Euerard stepping in not being called said I pray you Sir if there may bee a Church without a Bishop who shall ordaine the Priests in that Church D. Featly Sir what are you who intrude your selfe into our priuate conference It seemes you are a Romish Priest Are you not so M. Euerard I am no Priest D. Featly What will you deny your Priesthood M. Euerard I am no Priest to tell you D. Featly Now I perceiue you are not onely a Priest but a Iesuited Priest also For you can equiuocate M. Euerard It is no equiuocation to say I am no Priest to tell you D. Featly Indeed now that you expresse your mentall reseruation you vse no equiuocation but while you concealed it you did equiuocate And I maruell you blush not to vse such a simple shift or euasion as to say you are no Priest to tell me As if you or any man were made a Priest to tell another man you are a Priest At these words the meate was brought in and thereby a stop made of a farther reply for the present But not long after the Guests were all placed the L. reuiued the former question demanding of Doctor Featly L. F. Who should ordaine Priests in a Church where there are no Bishops D. Featly If there bee no Bishops in any adioyning Church by whom they may be ordained and presented to the Church I say in that case the Church to whom Christ as St. August saith gaue the keyes may commit Episcopall authority to certaine Priests and they thus authorized may ordaine other Priests as well as absolue and confirme the baptized and performe other acts ordinarily reserued to Bishops d And this ordination in a troubled state of the Church and in case of necessitie I hold to be lawfull and warrantable both because it hath that which the Apostle requireth 1. Tim. 4. 14. to wit the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery and because there haue bin presidents of such ordination in the Primitiue Church And questionles the Church that committeth the power to one Priest set in an eminent degree ouer the rest may commit the same power to more Presbyters or Priests especially considering it is the iudgement of learned diuines both Protestants and Papists that Bishops and Presbyters differ rather in execution of some acts of their order appropriated to Bishops onely then in their essentiall order A Bishop hath an eminencie of degree in the same order but his ecclesiasticall order is essentially the same with the Presbyters or Priests But what doth this question concerne any here present Neither wee nor for ought I know the Papists themselues define it to be a matter of faith necessary to saluato resolue this way or that way Therefore this question might haue been forborne M. Euerard The Councell of Trent hath defined it therefore to vs it is a matter of Faith D. Featly I scarcely beleeue the Councell of Trent bee it of what credit it may bee hath defined this point in such sort as you intimate M. Euarard I will shew it D. Featly When you shew it I will answer it After this passage some speech hauing been cast in by some of the table concerning differences in point of Religion among the Protestants of England D. Featly said it was to bee considered that the differences amongst the true members of the Church of England were only in point of Discipline and Ceremony not in point of Doctrine or matter of Faith But the Romanists differed one frō another in point of Doctrine and matter of Faith for the present saith he I will instance in two remarkeable particulars First touching the conception of the blessed Virgin secondly touching the Popes supreame authority euen ouer Generall Councells In the first point the Iacobins or dominicants maintaine that the blessed Virgin was conceiued in Originall sinne the Iesuites Franciscans and Sorbonists hold the contrary M. Euarard Yet both keepe the Feast of the immaculate Conception D. Featly They may both keepe a Feast vpon the same day and that for the Conception of our Lady But certainely they who beleeue she was conceiued in sin cannot without hipocrisie keepe a Feast of the immaculate Conception Touching the second point the Sorbonists haue euer held and doe hold to this day that a Generall Councell is aboue the Pope but the Iacobins Iesuits all orders of Friers generally besides many Secular Priests hold the contrary that the Pope is aboue a Generall Councell When I liued in Paris in the Ambassadors house I heard of a generall Chapter as they called it held by the Iacobins in Tho. Aquinas Schoole Where for many dayes together diuers diuinity questions were handled and among other this question touching the Popes superioritie to Councels An acute Serbone Doctor there present thus impugned the Iacobins assertion Whatsoeuer is defined in a Generall Councell confirmed by the Pope is infallibly true de fide But it is defined in a generall Councel to wit the Councel of Constance confirmed by Pope Martin the fifth that a Generall Councell is aboue the Pope Therefore it is infallibly true and de fide that a Generall Councell is aboue the Pope The Auditors the greater part of them very much applauded this argument of the Sorbonist and expressed their applause by a kinde of shout But the Iacobin respondent in a kinde of scorne answered it by retortion thus Whatsoeuer is defined in a generall Councell confirmed by the Pope is infallibly true and de fide But it is defined in a Generall Councell to wit the Councell of Lateran confirmed by Leo the tenth that the Pope is aboue a Generall Councell Therfore it is infallibly true and de fide that the Pope is aboue a Generall Councell At this Syllogisme the Iacobin had neere as great an applause as the Sorbonist Wee that were present of the Reformed Churches vnknowne to the Romanists receiued very much satisfaction to heare Papists amongst themselues thus bandy Councell and Pope against Councell and Pope For from both we concluded that sith contradictories cannot be both true and it appeared in matter of Faith that Generall Councels confirmed by Popes had decreed direct contradictories that therefore Generall Councels confirmed by Popes might erre and consequently that the strongest pillar of a Romanists Faith is weake and tottering M. Euerard The Councell of Constance which decreed a Generall Councell to be aboue the Pope was confirmed by Martin the fifth only in such points as were in that Councell determined against Hus and the Bohemians the Pope confirmed not all points defined in that Councell M. L. Haue you any example of any such confirmation of a Councell wherein some points defined by a
generall Councell are confirmed and the rest not M. Euerard There may bee such a confirmation of a Councell and it was so in that Councell For the Pope neuer confirmed this article touching a general Councels authoritie aboue the Pope D. Featly Had I knowne that I should haue met with you here at this time or that there should haue been any disputation about points of Religion I would haue brought my bookes with me and produced the Acts of the Councell For the present sith we haue not here the Tomes of the Councells all that I wil reply shall be this that as the Councell of Constance defined that a Generall Councell was aboue the Pope so they exercised their power and made good that decree by deposing three Popes in that Councell and setting vp a fourth by name this Martin the fifth whom it much concerned to confirme this Councell euen in that point M. Euerard Those three Popes I say deposed that Councell D. Featly Resolutely spoken and brauely but yet by your fauour the three Popes deposed by that Councell sate downe by the losse and the Fathers that deposed them stil held there Bishopricks and the fourth Pope chosen in that Councell held the Papacy during life This point being thus put off for the present vntill the Tomes of the Councels might be had and the Popes confirmation extant in them explained the Lady asked Doctor Featly Lady Faulkland Whether hee thought the ancient Fathers prayed not for the dead D. Featly Questionlesse they did and Aërius is condemned by them for simply and absolutely condemning the practise of the Church in naming the dead in their publike prayers and celebrating the Sacrament of the Eucharist that is of thanksgiuing for them Wee condemne not all commemoration of or prayers for the dead but the Popish manner of praying for the release of their soules out of Purgatory M. Euerard To what end should the Fathers pray for the dead if not for the release of their soules out of Purgatory D. Featly To what end doth the Church of Rome pray for the soule of blessed Leo and other Saints in heauen I trow not to release their soules out of Purgatorie M. Euerard The Church of Rome prayeth not for the soule of blessed Leo or any Saint now in heauen D. Featly Bellarmine saith she did and yet doth and proueth it out of Innocentius the Pope M. Euarard Will you put this vnder your hand D. Featly I will let it bee written Bellarmine saith that the Church of Rome prayed for the Soule of Saint Leo and other Saints Dan. Featly About this time Master Euerard hauing gotten the Councell of Trent called vpon Doctor Featly to acknowledge his error in denying that the Councell of Trent had defined it as a matter of Faith that a Bishop is in order aboue a Presbyter by the Law of God Looke heere saith he in the 23. Sess. Canon 6. expresly it defines this point g If any man shall say that in the Catholike Church there is not an Hierarchie instituted by Diuine ordination consisting of Bishops Presbyters and Ministers let him be accursed Can. 7. * If any man shall say that Bishops are not superiours to Priests or Presbyters let him be accursed D. Featly This Canon of the Trent Councell defineth not that Bishops Priests differ ordine sedgradu not that Bishops are in Ecclesiasticall order essentially different from Priests but that they haue a degree of superioritie in the same order Secondly the Councel defineth this as a truth but not as a matter of saluation for the Laietie to beleeue vpon paine of damnation And therfore I say as before that this point might haue bin forborne Thirdly the Councell defineth Bishops to be superiors to priests but sayth not iure diuino Here diuers of the auditors desired Doctor Featly and Master Euerard to disscusse the point touching Communion in one kinde which they conceiued to bee a point of great moment because if the Laietie as well as the Clergie ought to haue the Cup the Church of Rome doth them great wrong in debarring them of it and shee violateth Christs institution D. Featly If Master Euerard like well of it we will confine our selues to this point But first I desire a Bible For I will neuer dispute of point of Faith without Scripture the Ground of Faith M. Euerard What Bible will you haue For I allow not of the English Translation D. Featly The originall if it may be had especially the new Testament in Greeke M. Euerard I desire the Vulgar Latine Translation D. Featly What rather then the originall That is strange M. Euerard Not so For the Vulgar Latine is purer then the Greek of the new or the Hebrew of the old Testament D. Featly Will you set your hand to it M. Euerard I will The vulgar Latine Translation is purer then the Greeke of the new or the Hebrew of the olde Testament Ita est Euerard p. D. Featly This is a new and erroneous assertion if not blasphemous M. Euerard Neither erroneous nor new Other Catholikes haue held the same before me and namely Bellarmine De verbo dei lib. 2. cap. 11. Truely it can scarse be doubted but as the Latine Church hath beene more constant in retayning the Faith then the Greek so also that she hath been more vigilant in preseruing her bookes from corruption D. Featly 1. Although Bellarmine had come home to your assertion yet it followeth not but that it is new and erroneous Secondly the reason Cardinall Bellarmine vseth is not found that because the Latine Church hath preserued the Faith purer then the Greeke therefore the Latine Bibles kept by them are freer from corruption then the Greeke Originall For it is not true that the Latine that is as he meaneth the Romane Church hath kept the Faith more sincerely then the Greeke Beside the originall Greeke hath not oenly beene kept by the Greeke Church but also by the Latine Church which Latine Church no doubt had as great or greater care to preserue the Originall from corruption then the Latine Translation Thirdly Bellarmine affirmeth not so much as you doe For he speaketh not a word of the Hebrew of the old Testament in this place but onely of the Greeke of the new Whereas you preferre the Vulgar Latine not onely before the Greeke of the new but also the Hebrew of the old Neither doth Bellarmine say that the Vulgar Latine is simply to be preferred before the Greeke of the new but that the Latines were more carefullin keeping their Latine then the Greekes in keeping their Greeke This might be Bellarmines Iudgement without preferring the Latine absolutely before the Greek For albeit the Latine for a Translation were better kept then the Greeke for the Originall yet he might say still that the Translation must needs come behind the Originall simply A Translation be it neuer so good cannot come neere the Originall in authoritie though it be kept
cut of the rugged knobs not grate or weare out the heart of it Volo nasutum non polyposum Fourthly because the testimonies I cite out of these authors were neuer questioned much lesse proued to be taken for good by the aduersarie vntill he can disproue them according to the rule of the Ciuill law supponitur esse bonus qui non probatur esse malus he is supposed to be an honest man who was neuer proued otherwise To cal in then these ancients in that order as commonly they go First Anno 70. Dionysius Areopagita in his booke of Ecclesiasticall Hierarchie chap. 5. relateth the practise of the Church in his time on this manner z After the Priest hath prayed that he may holyly distribute and that they that are to partake of the Sacraments may receiue it worthily discouering the bread that before was couered and breaking it into many pieces and diuiding one Cup among all he multiplieth that in the signes which is but one and distributeth it Anno. 80. The second Martialis Lenoricensis who stileth himselfe a seruant of God and an Apostle of Iesus Christ in his epistle ad Burdigal writeth thus You heretofore honored the priests which deceiued you with their sacrifices which they offered to dumbe and deafe images that neither could helpe you nor themselues but now much more you ought to honour the Priests of Almighty God who minister life vnto you in the Cup and liuing Bread By this argument of Martials the Romish Priests that giue the people but an halfe Communion should lose halfe of the honour due vnto Gods Priests if not the whole For thus out of Martials premises I conclude Those and none but those Priests are to be honoured and reuerenced who administer life to the people in the Cup The Romish Priests administer not life to the people in the Cup Therefore they are not to bee reuerenced or honoured Anno 92. Thirdly Clemens in his second booke of Constitutions 57. chap. thus enioyneth after the offering of the sacrifice let euery order a part receiue the body of our Lord and his pretious blood Anno 100. Fourthly Ignatius the Scholer of Saint Iohn the Euangelist Bishop of Antioch and Martyr in his Epistle to the Philadelphians enforceth an argument to vnity from the Communion I exhort you to imbrace one faith one manner of preaching and vse of the Sacrament of the Lords Supper for the flesh of our Lord Iesus is one and his blood one that was shed for vs there is one bread also broken for all and one Cup distributed vnto all Bellarmine his first Answer Bellarmine is put to a miserable plunge in his answer to this allegation First he saith in the Latine copies the words of Ignatius are not as we cite them There is one Cup distributed vnto all but there is one Cup of the whole Church and though the Greeke copies reade as we do yet he saith that much credit is not to be giuen to them The Refutation Against this answer I reply First that if we may not trust the Greeke editions of Ignatius much lesse may we trust the Latine translations especially since of late they are come into hucksters hands To appeale from a translation to the originall is vsuall but to appeale from the originall to a translation is a thing vnheard of This is to make the brooke or streame to bee purer then the fountaine or spring The Poet teacheth Bellarmine another lesson Dulciùs ex ipso fonte bibuntur aquae Ignatius as it is well knowne wrote in Greeke and therefore vnlesse Bellarmine can proue that other Greeke copies agree with his Latine translation and not with ours he speaketh nothing to the purpose for a translation is of no credit further then it agrees with the originall Secondly euen Bellarmines corrupt translation maketh against the Church of Rome and prooueth that the practice in Ignatius his time was for the whole Church to communicate in both kinds for why else calleth he it Calicem totius Ecclesiae The Cup of the whole Church Ignatius there speakes not of the possession but of the vse of the Cup and if the Priests onely had dranke of it hee would haue called it the Priests Cup but in terming it the Cup of the whole Church he plainely signifieth that the whole Church vsed it in the celebration of the Lords Supper Bellarmine his second answere Secondly Bellarmine saith that the force of Ignatius his argument consisteth in the vnitie of the Cup and not in the vniuersalitie of them that drinke for he exhorteth there to vnitie The Refutation First Ignatius exhorts there all to vnitie because all eate of one bread and drinke of one cup. His argument therefore standeth both in the vniuersalitie of them that drinke and the vnitie of the Cup and it may be thus reduced into forme All that eate of one bread and drinke of one holy Cup in remembrance of one body offered and one blood shed for all ought to embrace vnitie But all you of the Church of Philadelphia people as well as Priests eate of one bread and drinke of one holy Cup in memory of one body offered and one blood of Christ shed for you all Therefore all you of the Church of Philadelphia ought to embrace vnitie and godly loue If the pinch or straine of the argument were in vnitie only it would not hold for if some onely dranke of this Cup and not others this should rather make more for a diuision then for vnitie it is the communion of more in one that Ignatius layeth for the ground of his argument enforcing vnitie Secondly howsoeuer the argument stands it makes no great matter sith we insist not so much vpon the argument it selfe as vpon that his expresse affirmation That one Cup in his time was giuen vnto all This assertion alone sufficiently prooueth the practise of the Church in his time Bellarmine his third answere Thirdly Bellarmine saith that nothing can be inforced from these words of Ignatius but that it was the vse in that time when there were but few Christians to giue the Cup vnto all but this is an example it is no precept so the Cardinall The Refutation First it is not true which he here affirmeth that there were but few Christians in Ignatius his time for all histories of those times and the Epistles of Ignatius testifie the contrary and in this very Church of Philadelphia the holy Ghost testifieth Apoc. 3. 8. That there were many Christians Behold I haue set before thee an open dore and no man shall shut it c. Secondly though the Primitiue Church were not of that large extent as the Church in suceeding ages yet the authoritie of the Church in that age in which the Apostles liued and their immediate successors is farre greater then in any later age Thirdly in this last answere the Cardinall yeeldeth vs the cause for we cite these words of
Ignatius onely to prooue the practise of the Primitiue Church and thus much Bellarmine confesseth whereupon I adde that this confessed practise of the Primitiue Church was grounded on our Lords precept drinke you all of this for the Church so neere Christ cannot bee supposed to haue swarued any way from his institution by adding any thing vnto it or taking away from it certainely Ignatius and the Churches wherein he bore sway obserued the order and practise of Saint Iohn his master and if Saint Iohn administred the Cup in all Churches to the people so did the rest of the Apostles for they varied not from Christ or among themselues in celebrating the Lords Supper And what the Apostles did ioyntly no Christian doubteth but they did by the direction of the holy Ghost according to our Lords will and commandement And thus wee see this example amounteth to a precept and the practise in Ignatius his time ought to bee a president for all future times SECT II. Testimonies of the Practise of the Christian Churches in the second Age. From 100. to 200. Anno Dom. 150. IVstin Martyr in his second apologie thus writeth They which are called Deacons among vs giue to euery one that is present of the consecrated Bread and Wine And when he hath related the whole manner of the celebration of the Eucharist as it were to preuent a cauill that might be made and is now made by Papists the Martyr heere sheweth the practise of the Church but maketh no mention of the precept of our Sauiour as that they did so in deed but were not bound so to doe he further addeth for the close as they report that Iesus commanded them or as they haue deliuered vnto vs Iesus his command giuen vnto them Bellarmine his answere Bellarmine repineth at this so expresse a testimony of so ancient a Father and so renowned a Martyr and therefore laboureth to disparage it some way or other Si non aliqu â nocuisset mortuus esset Yet all that he saith to it is but this that those last words of the Martyr which mentioneth Christs precept belong not to the Communion but to the Consecration The Refutation This solution will no way beare water First it is euident to any that reads the whole place that Iustin Martyrs words wherein he mentioneth Christs precept belongeth both to the Consecration and to the Communion For after he had spoken of the Communion he subioyneth these words And therefore they cannot bee seuered from the Communion The series or method of the passage in Iustin is thus hauing rehearsed the words of the Institution This is my body doe this in remembrance of me and this Cup is the new Testament drinke you all of this he addeth and he commanded that they onely should participate as had been before washed in the lauer of Regeneration and lead such a life as Christ prescribed them These words that they onely should participate clearely conuince the Cardinall and demonstrate that Iustin Martyr extendeth Christs command both to the Consecration and to the Commumunion it selfe which in Christs precept cannot be deuided both being enioyned in this one precept doe this in remembrance of me that is Consecrate and Communicate Secondly howsoeuer the Cardinall by any tricke of sophistrie shall dismember the whole sentence and pull these words As Christ commanded from the rest and refer them to which part of the sentence he pleaseth yet he can neuer smoother the light of truth shining in these words The Deacons deliuer or minister to euery one of the consecrated bread and wine The practice then of those times maketh for vs against the Church of Rome The Deacons then as the Ministers now deliuered the Sacrament to the people in both kindes Anno. 152. Laurence Deacon to Pope Sixtus cryed out to him as hee was led to his Martyrdome Whether goest thou father without thy sonne whether hastest thou Priest without thy Leuite try whether thou hast chosen a fit minister to whom thou hast committed the dispensation of our Lords blood Wilt thou denie me to bee a copartner with thee in the effusion of thy blood who hast made me a copartner with thee in the celebration of our Lords blood This giueth such light to Iustin Martyrs words and so fully accordeth with them that Tiletanus the defender of the councell of Trent confesseth that it is manifest that in this age the vse of both kinds was common to all Anno 180. Saint Irenaeus Bishop of Lions and Martyr in the fourth booke against heresies and 34. cha proueth the resurrection of the flesh and eternall life by an argument drawne from the faithfulls eating Christs flesh in the Eucharist and he presseth his argument in this manner How doe they viz. the heretiques say that the flesh should be vtterly corrupted and neuer rise againe which is nourished with the body and blood of Christ and a little after Our bodies by participating the Eucharist or Sacrament of our Lords supper are not now corruptible or shall not vtterly be corrupted and come to nothing because they haue the hope of theresurrection Irenaeus speaketh of all Christians people as well as Priests for all faithfull Christians haue hope of a blessed resurrection and he saith that they are nourished with the bodie and blood of Christ by participating of the Sacrament of his supper Papists answer The Romanists seeke to auoyde these and the like passages by their doctrine of concomitancie auerring that the blood of Christ is not seuered from his body and consequently that the Laietie take the blood in the body and are nourished therewith to eternall life and this say they is all that can bee gathered from Irenaeus his words They are nourished with the blood of Christ which they receiue together with his body not with the blood of Christ which they take by it selfe in the Cup. The Refutation This answer of theirs is weake and insufficient First because it is built on a weake and ruinous foundation viz. the reall and carnall presence of Christs body in the Sacrament vnder the accidents of bread and wine which I haue else where by Scriptures and Fathers refelled See the fisher caught in his owne net part 2. That the doctrine of concomitancie is builded vpon the reall and carnall presence is not denied by the Romanists for they make the one the ground of the other Secondly albeit wee should grant that the Laiety in some sence receiue the blood of Christ in the bread yet they receiue it not so as Christ commandeth for they receiue it not by drinking No man drinketh in eating or eateth in Drinking Thirdly the blood of Christ which wee receiue in the Sacrament we receiue not as subsisting in his veines or as being a part of or ioyned vnto his body but as shed for vs In which quality and manner it is impossible to receiue the blood of Christ together with and in the body by naturall
Sacrament of the body and blood of Christ. With what face then can our aduersaries deny the Cup to Lay men when the ancient Church deliuered it vsually to religious women such as were Patricia and Gorgonia Anno 375. Ambrose in his fifth booke de sacramentis chap. 1. elegantly applieth Moses his striking the rocke and the water flowing out thereupon to the holy communion saying see the mystery Moses that is a Prophet the Rod that is Gods word the Priest with the Word of God toucheth the rock and the water floweth and the people of God drinke it The Priest therefore toucheth the Cup and there aboundeth in the Cup water springing to eternall life and the people of God drinketh and obtaineth the grace of God The same S. Ambrose as Theoderet writes in his fifth booke of Ecclesiasticall storie and 17. chap. repelleth the Emperor Theodosius from the Communion with these words How darest thou take into thy hands sprinckled with blood the holy body of Christ How presumest thou to lift vp his dreadfull blood to thy mouth who in thy rage hast spilt vniustly so much blood Wee see in Saint Ambroses time that both Prince and people communicated in both kinds albeit Theodosius at this time were deseruedly suspended from the participating of Christs body as well as his blood Yet after hee had cleansed his bloody hands with penitent teares he was admitted to the blessed Sacrament and he receiued both the blessed Body and the holy Cup into his hands Cardinall Bellarmine himselfe in his answer to this our allegation out of Theodoret saith We confesse that both kinds haue been sometimes giuen to the Laietie but we denie that it is so commanded by Gods Law A poore and miserable euasion For first many of the ancients whom wee haue before alleadged doe not onely testifie the practise of their times but vrge diuine precept for it Secondly they indifferently exhort the Laietie as well as the Clergie to the Communion in both kinds and vrge a like necessitie for both but the Papists themselues confesse that the Cleargie who administer the Communion are bound by the Law of God to communicate in both kinds and sith Sacraments may not be administred to any without order and command from him who instituted them questionlesse the ancient Church would neuer haue vsually administred the Cup to the Laietie with the bread if they had not conceiued that Christs words Drinke ye all of this belonged to them as well as to the Cleargie Anno. 390. Hierome vpon the eleuenth of the 1. Cor. The Lords Supper ought to be cōmon to all because Christ equally deliuered the Sacraments to all his disciples who were there present It is to be noted that he vseth the word Sacraments in the plurall number speaking onely of the Lords Supper whereby it is euident that by Sacraments hee vnderstandeth the elements bread and wine and from Christs example enforceth that they be equally deliuered to all communicants The same Saint Hierome speaketh yet more expresly of the Laietie receiuing the Cup from the Priest in the Eucharist in his comment on the 3. chap. of Zephanie the Priests also who administer the Eucharist deuide the blood of the Lord to his people commit wickednes against the Law To which allegation Cardinall Bellarmine answereth nothing but we heare no newes It is true we heare no newes out of Saint Ieroms mouth For all the fathers aboue alleadged testifie as much and this Bellarmine is for ced to grant Durum telum necessitas ignoscite If he could haue coyned any new answer wee should haue had somewhat else from him then Nihil noui audimus but seeing hee brings nothing new to impeach our argument I need not to adde any new confirmation Anno 398. In the fourth councell of Carthage it is ordered that if any penitent desire the peace of the Church when he lyeth on his death bed if it bee beleeued that he will presently depart that the Church peace be giuen vnto him by laying on of hands and vt ori eius effundatur Eucharistia and that the Sacrament be powred into his mouth Anno 399. Saint Chrysostome in his 18. homily in the 2. epist. to the Corinth makes it a cleere case that the people by the new law haue as good interest to the entire Sacrament as the Priest Sometimes or in some things there is no difference betweene the people and the Priest as in the participation of the dreadfull mysteries for all are equally admitted vnto them In the time of the old testament it was not lawfull for the people to eat of those things of which the Priests did eate but it is not so now for one body is offered to all and one Cup. The Papists answer Bellarmine answereth that the difference which Saint Chrysostome obserues betweene the sacrifices of the old and new Testament was that the sacrifice of the old was deuided into parts and could not bee entirely taken by any one and hence it came to passe saith he that some receiued a greater and some a lesse portion and for the most part the Priests part was the greatest but this our Sacrament is giuen intirely to euery one neither hath the Priest more then the Lay people although the symboles are more or greater in the Communion of the Priests then of the people Refutation This slight colour of answer is easily washed away for First Saint Chrysostome in the originall Greek hath no word signifying parts or diuision into parts but saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. that the Priest fed on other things and that the Laietie might not feed vpon the same as for example The laitie might not at all eat of the shew bread and in the sacrifices the people might not eate of the same specie or numero which the Priest eate For the Law expresly set downe what belonged to the Priest to eate and what to the people but in the new Testament it is not so for the people may eat of the bread which the Priest eateth and drinke also of the same Cup. This is euidently Saint Chrysostomes meaning Secondly although it is true which Bellarmine saith that the whole Sacrament is eaten by euery Communicant yet this must be vnderstood of the integrity of the thing signified and of the essence of that signe not of the integrity of the quantitie of the outward elements For no one man eateth the whole loafe or quantity of bread that is consecrated nor drinketh the whole measure of wine that is sanctified but a portion onely Herein then the difference is not betweene the Priests of the old Law and the Priests of the new that the Priests of the old Law might eate but a part of the Sacrifice but the Priests of the new might eat the whole For if we speake of the thing signified both receiued the whole if of the signes neither receiues the whole that is the entire quantity of
potatur abluitur sanctificatur Who can expresse how great mercie it was by that most holy effusion of his pretious blood to redeeme mankind and to giue to his members the most holy mysterie of his quickning body and blood by the partaking whereof his body which is the Church is nourished as with meat and drinke is washed and sanctified These and other passages of Gregory are so cleare and bright that they dazeled the eies of Estius a great Parisian Doctor who handling this question professedly acknowledgeth that Saint Gregory among other fathers is expresly for the Commmunion in both kinds Anno Dom. 620. The Seruice Booke commonly called Ordo Romanus The Romane order set forth by Gregory or vnder Pope Gregory with his allowance sufficiently discouereth the present practise of the Romane Church in their dry Masses to be a disorder and shamefull abuse For there they may reade and blush to reade in the Rubricke these formes set downe at the Communion Wee humbly beseech thee that wee which haue taken the body and blood of our Lord Iesus Christ thy Sonne may be filled with grace and heauenly benediction and after the Communion Let thy body O Lord which we haue taken and thy blood which we haue drunke sticke to our bowels that no blot of sinne may remaiue in vs who haue beene refreshed by these pure and holy mysteries Anno 630. Saint Isidore as in other things so in this treadeth his master Gregories steps de diuin of fic lib. 1. c. 15. The fourth prayer is brought in for the kisse of peace vt omnes that all being reconciled by charitie may ioyne in the worthie participation of Christs body and blood omnes all People therefore as well as Priests vnlesse they will haue the people to be out of charity all that are in charity must communicate together in the mistery of Christs body and blood But Gods people are or ought to be in charity and therefore to be admitted by Saint Isidores rule as well to the Cup as to the bread at the Lords Table Anno. 633. In the fourth Councell of Toledo Can. 6. All the people are appointed one good fryday to aske pardon for their sinnes that being clensed by the compunction of repentance they may be thought fit one Easter day to receiue the sacrament of Christs body and blood And in the seuenth Canon it is appointed that after the Lords prayer and the blessing of the people the Sacrament of Christs body and blood bee receiued after this manner the Priest and Leuite is to communicate before the Altar the rest of the Clergie in the Quire the rest of the people without the Quire See also 57. Canon Anno 675. In the eleuenth Councell held at Toledo the fathers determine that such who receiued the Cup in extemity of sicknesse but refused the bread because in regard of the drines of their throat they could not swallow it downe should not therefore bee cut off from Christs body The decree runneth thus The infirmity of humane nature in the very passage out of this life is accustomed to be oppressed in such sort with drought that the sick are not able to take downe any meat to refresh them no nor scarse any drop of drinke to strengthen them which thing we haue obserued in the departure of many who desiring the wished foode of the holy Communion to sustaine them in their last iourney haue yet cast away the Eucharist giuen them by the Priest not out of infidelitie but because they could not swallow any thing down beside a small draught of the holy Cup such as these therefore ought not to bee separated from the body of Christ. The Councell speaketh of the Laiety refusing bread at the Priests hands which they could not take downe and yet receiuing the Cup and in this case of necessitie the Councell dispenceth with their refusing the bread but findeth no fault with them for taking the Cup. Nay vpon that point excuseth them from infidelitie and saueth them from excommunication How doth this Councel clash and crosse shins as it were with the Councel of Constance and Trent In these the people are condemned for taking the Cup in that they are acquitted for it In them the Priest is censured that giueth them the Cup in this the people are absolued from censure in refusing the bread because they Communicate in the Cup. In the same yeere in the Councell at Braccara they are blamed that ministred not wine to the people in the Sacrament but either milke or grapes Can. 2. Non expressum vinum in sacramento dominici calicis offerre sed lac pro vino dedicare aut oblatis vuis populo communicare In the same Councell they are blamed also Qui intinctam Eucharistiam populis pro complemento communionis porrigerent Who deliuered to the people a piece of bread dipt in wine for the whole Communion which custome how repugnant it is to the doctrine of the Gospell and custome of the Church may easily be proued from the fountaine of truth who gaue the Cut by it selfe saying Drinke yee all of this as he tooke the bread by it selfe saying Take eat c. SECT VIII The Testimonies of the practise of the Church from 700. to 800. IN this age wee haue foure concurrent witnesses and contestatours beyond all exception Beda Greg. 2. Greg. 3. Alcumus We will produce them in order And first Venerable Beda Anno 720. Venerable Beda the honour of England and mirrour of his time witnesseth as followeth Christ washeth vs daily from our sins in his blood when the memory of his passion is celebrated or recounted at the Altar where the creatures of bread and wine by the vnspeakable sanctification of the Spirit are changed into the Sacrament of his flesh and blood and therby his body blood is not powred out by the hands of Infidels to their destruction but is receiued or is taken by or into the mouth of the faithful to saluation In this testimony I note first that he teacheth not a substantiall change of the elements of bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ but a sacramentall onely agreeable to the harmony of Protestants Confession Se condly that Beda either alludes vnto or transcribes herein the words of S. Gregory aboue alleaged which I haue there proued to be most pregnant to our purpose Anno 726. Gregory 2. in his Epistle of Images to Leo Isaurus A man that hath sinned and confessed after they haue well chastened and punished him with fasting let them impart vnto him the pretious body of our Lord and giue him his holy blood to drinke Anno 731. Gregory 3. in his former Epistle to Boniface forbiddeth at the Lords Table more then one Cup to be vsed saying It is not a fitting thing to put two or three Chalices on the Altar No doubt the reason why more Chalices were put on the Altar was for the vse of
Petrus Dresensis taught publikely that the Laietie might not communicate vnder one kind as is confessed by Didacus de Tapia in sent lib. 4. Anno 1412. Iacobellus Misnensis a Preacher of Prage being admonished by Petrus Dresensis after hee had searched into the writings of the ancient doctours and by name Dionysius and Saint Cyprian and finding in them the communicating of the Cup to the Laiety commanded he from thence forth exhorted the people by no means to neglect or omit the receiuing the Communion of the Cup. Anno 1414. In the Councell of Constance in which the entire Communion is professedly oppugned yet the Truth extorted frō her bloody aduersaries a remarkeable confession of the practise of the Primitiue Church and of the continuance of it in diuers parts euen vntil the time of the calling of that Assembly In the petition of those that procured this Synod it is expressed that one cause for which the procurers desired that the Church should take order for the establishing of a law touching the laieties cōmunicating in one kind is declared to be because in some parts of the world the Priests did not forbeare to administer the communiō to the laiety in both kinds against the custome of the Romish Church Here we haue the continuance of this practise the antiquity whereof they likewise acknowledged in the preface to their sacrilegious decree against it Although Christ instituted and gaue the sacrament after supper in both kinds to his disciples and in the primitiue Church it was in like wise administred yet the Councell for certaine reasons commands that the sacrament be otherwise administred As the tree f gaines more branches by being lopped with the axe so the Truth gaineth much lustre and authority from the very Canon of the Councell of Constance by which her aduersaries doe seeke to oppresse her For who will not rather follow Christs institution then their ordinance and the ancient acknowledged practise of the Primitiue Church rather then a late custome of the present Romish Church Anno 1420. Martin the fifth after the Councel of Constance vpon Easter day after hee had deliuered the body of our Lord with his owne hands to the Laiety suffered them to receiue the blood of Christ at the hands of the Deacon The like Henry Kalteysin reportes of other Popes and withall acquaints vs with the cause why the Pope left off this custome It fell out saith he that a certaine Bohemian came amongst the rest to the Popes chappel and receiued the Communion at his hands and hee wonderfully bragged of it whereof Pope Martin being aduertised and much inraged that such a trick was put vpon him from that time tooke away the Cup from the Laiety Anno 1430. Thomas Waldensis who tooke vpon him to refute Wickliffes bookes howsoeuer he maintained the decree of the Councell of Constance touching Communion in one kind yet hee witnesseth that greater personages amongst the people and men of note or place as Kings and doctors and others that were thought worthie so great a mystery were admitted to the Communion in both kinds Anno 1413. In the Councell held at Basil as Nauclerus writeth tom 2. generat 48. a kinde of hope was offered to the Bohemians that vpon certaine conditions the vse of the Cup might be restored vnto them The order of the Councell is conceiued in these words If the Bohemians continue in the desire of the Communion in both kinds and send an Embassage to the Councell to that purpose the holy assembly shall giue libertie to the Priests of Bohemia and Morauia to administer the Communion in both kinds to such persons as being in yeeres of discretion shall reuerently desire it Anno 1438. The Bohemians put the faith and honesty of the Fathers of Basil to the Test they send comissioners Iohn Belouar of Prage Iohn Rokyzana Peter Panie Procopius and others to treat about the concession of the Cup and to expresse their earnest and vnfained desire thereof To whom the Councell returneth this answer That the request should be granted them so that they will really effectually keep vnitie with the Church and conforme themselues in all other things saue the communion in both kinds to the faith and rites of the vniuersall Church SECT XVI Testimonies of the practise of the Church from 1500. to 1600. IN this Age I might produce many Testimonies of such learned Doctors and Professors of the Gospell as haue beene by Gods prouidence raised vp in the Reformed Churches in former and latter yeeres who by their writings learnedly soundly haue mainteined the cause we haue in hand as also doe the ioynt and vnanimous Confessions of the Churches of England France Scotland Germany Polonia Sweueland Morauia Howbeit because the Romanists doe except against all the foresaid witnesses as insufficient and of no authority because they haue departed from their Synagogue therefore I will alleage some prime Doctors of this Age also and men of eminency among themselues maintaining the same truth with vs against whom I see not what iust exception may be taken by them Anno 1541. Gerardus Lorichuis zealously oppugning the sacrilegious practise of the Church of Rome There be false Catholicks saith he that are not ashamed by all meanes to hinder the reformation of the Church They to the intent that the other kind of the sacrament may not be restored to the Lay people spare no kind of blasphemie For they say Christ said onely to his Apostles Drinke yee all of this but the words of the Canon of the Masse be these Take and eate yee all of this Here I beseech them let them ◅ell me whither they wil haue this word all onely to pertaine vnto the Apostles then must the Lay people abstaine from the other kind of the bread also Which thing to say is an heresie and a pestilent and detestable blasphemie Wherefore it followeth that each of these words were spoken to the whole Church Anno 1545. The Ambassadours for the Emperour and for the French King were earnest sutors to the Fathers in the Councell of Trent for the restitution of the Cup to the Layety Anno 1562. The obseruation of Seneca That a lye is of a thin and transparent nature a diligent eye may see through it was verified in the Diuines and Bishops present at the Councell of Trent Whereof some saw obscurely others clearely through this grand lye of the Romish Church which vnder colour of concomitancy subtracteth the vse of the Cup from the Layety For Antonius Mandulfe◅sis had a glympse but Card. Madrutius Gaspar de casa and the Bishop of Quinque Ecclesi◅ and also Amans Seruito a Friar had a full sight of the truth in this point Antonius Mandulfensis Chaplain to the Bishop of Prage professedly impugned the distinction of the Eucharist as a Sacrament and as a sacrifice which distinction the Papists at this day hold before them
Sacrament To coyne new Fathers is a vsuall practise and therefore of no transcending merit but to coyne new Canons of generall Councels and to forge records of such antiquitie as is the true Councell of Ephesus can be no lesse then a worke of superarrogation To the allegation out of the Councell of Constance we answer first that it was no generall Councell The Easterne Church of as large or larger extent then the Westerne sent no Patriarch or Bishop thither Secondly this Councell is impeached by the Romane Church it selfe Bellarmine de concil cap. 7. k speaking of this Councell of Constance saith this Councel so much as concerneth the first sessions is disallowed and repealed in the Councels of Florence and Lateran Albertus Pighius is yet hotter against this Councell saying that it decreed against the order of nature against manifest Scriptures against the authoritie of all antiquitie and against the Catholicke faith of the Church What credit is then to be giuen to this erroneous and perfidious Councell Which both adulterated the Christian faith by heretical decisions and brake their morrall faith by bloody crueltie exercised against Iohn Hus and Hierome of Prague to whom safe conduct to the Councell and backe againe was promised If the Romanists themselues reiect this Councell in point of the Popes Supremacie why may not we in point of the Sacrament Lastly out of this very Councell wee may draw an inuincible argument against the halfe Communion The institution of Christ and practise of the Primitiue Church ought to sway more with euery good Christian then any constitution of a late Councell neuer generally approued of by the Church of God But the Communion in both kinds hath the institution of Christ and the practise of the Primitiue Church for it as is confessed by the Fathers in this Councell Therefore euery good Christian ought to communicate in both kinds the prohibition of the Councell of Constance to the contrary notwithstanding To the allegation out of the Councell of Basil our answer is the stronger by how much the authoritie of this Councell is weaker or rather of no validitie at all First there lyeth against it the same exception which we tooke before against the Councell of Constance that none of the Bishops of the Easterne Churches were present at it and in this regard it cannot bee held for an Occomenicall or generall Councell Secondly while the Fathers of this Councell sate at Basil the Pope fearing least some thing might be done to his preiudice called an other Councell at Ferrara and ◠in this regard the Councell of Basil cannot be esteemed a generall or totall Councell no not so much as of the Westerne or Romane Church Thirdly the Acts of this Councell are repeated in the Councell of Florence and Lateran Pighius writes as bitterly against it as against the Councell of Constance and Cardinall Bellarmine writing of it saith There is nothing of this Councell ratified and allowed but certaine orders about benefices the Councell it selfe is reiected and condemned in the Councell of Lateran Sess. 11. No maruell then if Protestants account the decrees of this Synode no better then drosse when by the Roman test it selfe they are proued to bee no good mettell Wherefore as the Romane Oratour makes a Dilemma touching Brutus and Antonie being in Armes one against the other if Brutus bee a preseruer of his country Antonie is an enemie if Antony be a Consul Brutus is an enemie so may we say of those two Councels of Basil and Lateran if the Councell of Basil bee Catholick Lateran is hereticall if Lateran be Catholick the Councell of Basil is hereticall Lastly be this Councell of Basil of what authoritie it may be the Romanists loose more by it then they gaine For though the halfe Communion were after a sort established in this Councell yet the Bohemians petition for the intire Communion was yeelded vnto and signed in this Councell whence we thus argue against them If the Papists arguments drawne from danger of irreuerence inconueniences examples or testimonies of antiquity and pretended consequences of Scripture were necessary and concludent the Councell of Basil could not lawfully grant to the Bohemians and Morauians the vse of the Cup but the Councell of Basil might lawfully and did yeeld to the Bohemians and the Morauians the vse of the cup Therfore the reasons of the Romanists drawn to the contrary from the heads aboue mentioned are not necessarie or concludent CHAP. XIIII The Arguments of Papists drawne from ancient pretended rites of the Church answered and retorted THere is no more certaine signe of a bad cause then extorted testimonies and wyer-drawne arguments such as our aduersaries for want of better insist vpō in this question For the truth neuer wanteth voluntarie witnesses to depose for her nor arguments that offer themselues in her defence as the Poets faine that stones came of their owne accord to the building of Thebes Such are those proofes which the texts of scpriture without any forcing and the free deposition of all ages before alleaged haue furnished vs withall On the contrarie our aduersaries straine antient rites and customes weakely proued and peruersely applied to excuse their sacrilege They tell vs of reseruing the Sacrament for a long space of carrying it home to mens houses giuing it to infants and impotent persons on their death-bed to Priests put out of their ranck for misdemeanour and lastly of a Communion of such things as were before consecrated All which obseruations are as headlesse arrowes shot at randome Falces petebamus we demand sithes and they answer vs with mattocks Our question is of the publike and generall practise of the Church their answer is of priuate customes our question is of the lawfull vse of the Lords Supper their answer is of abuses and corruptions our question is of the depriuing the Laietie of the Cup their answer is of Priests our question is of fit and worthie receiuers qualified to communicate in both kinds their answer is of children excommunicate persons or men lying on their death-beds This might suffice to wash away their varnish of antiquitie Yet lest they should accuse vs as Fimbria did sometimes Scecuola quòd non totum telum corporereceperimus that wee receiued not the ful thrust into our body I wil bring in their great Cardinal laying amaine at vs in this wise SECT I. From the reseruation of the Sacrament thus he disputeth against vs That the Sacrament was accustomed antiently to be reserued we haue proued by the testimonies of Fathers Councels Now that it was reserued in one kind onely and consequently that the communicants receiued in one kind onely it is manifest because sometimes they reserued it for a very long time Sophronius in his spirituall meddow relates of the keeping of it for a whole yeere but wine especially in a small quantitie could not be kept so long because within that time it would be corrupted The answer First
although wee grant that the antient Church vpon some occasions reserued the holy elements after the Communion yet not for any long space They had no reason nor neede so to do because as Saint Ambrose teacheth vs the Church consecrated euery day for strangers and twise in the weeke for the inhabitants As for Sophronius his tale of keeping the Sacrament for a whole yeere it is a fit flower for his spirituall meddow which no man euer saw or heard of vnlesse it were in Sir Thomas Moores Vtopia I giue much more credit to Alphonsus his experiment who locking vp a consecrated wafer in a Casket of gold after a few months opened it and found nothing in it but a worme Secondly as wine cannot be long kept but it will sowre so neither can bread but it will grow mustie and of the two if care be had to stop close the vessel to keepe out aire the wine will keepe sweet longer then the bread If the Cardinall fly to a miracle I answer that by the same miracle whereby the bread was kept a whole yeere from moulding the wine was or might haue beene kept from sowring Retortion Thirdly this headlesse arrow may thus bee headed and shot backe vpon our aduersaries If the Sacrament were antiently reserued in both kinds then the custome of reseruing it maketh for and not against the Laieties Communion in both kinds But the Sacrament was antiently reserued in both kinds Therefore the custome of reseruing the Sacrament maketh for and not against the Laieties communicating in both kinds That the holy mysteries were kept in the Primitiue Church in both kinds appeareth manifestly by Saint Chrysostome in his first Epistle to Inocentius Nicephorus Histor. Eccles. lib. 13. cap. 19 and Cardinall Baronius himselfe whose words are very obseruable Here O Reader consider saith he how wide they are of the Traditions of the Fathers and the vse of the Catholick Church who deny that the holy Eucharist in our time ought to bee kept which we see in antient times was reserued not onely in the forme or kind of bread but also in the other kind to wit in the wine You haue this proued by the authority of Saint Gregory in the 3. of his dialogues where he saith that the Marriners carried in the ship the body and blood of Christ. SECT II. The second headlesse arrow is their argument deduced from the carrying the holy mysteries after consecration into priuat houses and thus they draw this arrow at vs The second rite or custome of the antient Church was to carrie the Sacramēt home and there to take it at some seasonable time This custome is most certainly proued out of Tertullian his second book to his wife Clem. Alexand. stromatum li. 1. Cyprian Serm. de Lapsis Basil epist. to Cesarea Patricia Hierom. Apolog. contra Iouinian Now that the Christians were went to communicate at home in one kind onely it is manifest both for that the onely forme of bread was giuen to the hands of the faithful the blood being drunke out of a Chalice as Cyrill demonstrateth in his 5. Catechisme also because their were no Chalices in the bouses of Lay-men or holy vessels to receiue the blood of Christ as it may be euidently gathered out of the second Apologie of Athanasius r Harding imbellisheth this argument with a miraculous narration out of Saint Cyprian that when a woman had gone about with vnworthie hands to open her Coffer where the holy thing of our Lord was laid vp she was made afraid with fier that rose vp from thence so as she durst not touch it The answer First this argument is very impertinent to the purpose and in consequence also For the question is of the publike vse of the Sacrament in the Church this argument proceedes vpon priuate abuse thereof in mens houses at home Now an argument from a meere abuse is an abusiue argument and concludes nothing A meere falsehood cannot proue a truth nor a corrupt custome the lawfull vse of any thing Saint Austine giues vs a golden rule to the contrary Doctrines are to bee weighed not in the deceitfull ballances of their owne customes but in the euen ballances of diuine scriptures In which if this custome of carrying the Sacrament home to their houses be wighed it will bee found too light And therefore it is reiected and condemned vnder a curse in a Councel holden at Cesar-Augusta in Spaine If any man receiue the Sacrament eat not the same presently in the Church let him be accursed for euer And likewise in the first Councell of Toledo cap. 14. If any man receiuing the Sacrament of the Priest doe not presently eate it let him be driuen out for a sacrilegious person As for the miracle of fier vrged by M. Harding it burnes his owne fingers For God shewed himselfe by that miracle to bee offended with that which the woman did fraying her that kept the Sacrament in her coffer with a flame of fier Secondly this corrupt custome is no shaddow of proofe for the Laities communicating in one kind For as they caried the bread home to their houses so they might also a portion of wine yea but saith Bellar. they had no Chalices at home what then they might haue and had bottles or glasses in which they might and did carrie part of the consecrated wine home to their houses Retortion Thirdly this headlesse arrow may bee thus headed and shotte backe vpon our aduersaries If the Sacrament were antiently carried home to Lay-mens houses in both kinds then this custome of carrying it home makes not against but for the Laieties Communion in both kinds But the Sacrament was antiently carryed home to Lay-mens houses in both kinds Therefore that custome maketh for and not against the Laieties Communion in both kinds That the Sacrament was carried home in both kinds is proued by the vndeni able testimonies of Iustin Martyr Gregorie Nazianzenus and S. Hierome Iustin Martyr declaring the order of the Church in his time saith thus of the things that be consecrated to wit the bread water and wine they giue a part to euery one and they carrie the same things to those that are absent Gregory Nazianzen writeth of his sister Gorgonia that if her hand had layed vp any portion of the tokens of the pretious body and of the blood in deuotion shee mingled it with teares and so receiued it Saint Hierome highly commending Exuperius Bishop of Tolosa saith of him there was no man richer then he that carried the Lords body in a wicker basket and his blood in a glasse SECT III. The third headlesse arrow is an argument deduced from the Communion of Infants Thus they draw it at vs The third rite of the Church is the administring the Communion to Infants For the antient did sometimes administer the Cōmunion to Infants but vnder one kind only namely by dropping
Lay-man that communicateth in one kind recipit gratiam 4. receiueth grace but in 4. degrees Nugnus in 3. partem Thom. quest 80. art 12. Thus hauing remoued all rubs and obstacles out of the way wee haue passed clearely throughout all Ages from the time of Christ and his Apostles and in euery hundred yeere since produced euidence against the Church of Rome And finally by verdict of some Doctors of chiefe credit among themselues found her to be guiltie of sacrilege in taking away the Cup from the Laiety at the Lords Table If any demand where this Cup may be found I answer as we read in o Genesis it is found with Beniamin I meane the Reformed Churches Etymon filij dextrae chrildren of Christs right hand by which hee distributeth to his people the bread of life and wine of Immortalitie his most pretious body and blood There is yet palpable darknes in Egypt but there is light in Goshen In Rome vnder the Papacie the people are fed with Huskes of legendary fables or at the best with mustie bread of old traditions and sowred with the leauen of heresie And all their publike Communions are dry feasts but in the Reformed Churches the people are fed with the flowre of Wheat the sincere Word of God and drinke of the purest iuyce of the Grape the blood of our Redeemer in the holy Sacrament What shall wee therefore render to the Lord for all the benefits which hee hath bestowed vpon vs we will take the Cup of Saluation and continually call vpon the name of the Lord. So be it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Finis Deolaus sine fine Cassander tract de Communione de vtraque specie pag. 1019. edit Paris 1616. Veteres omnes tam Graeci quà m Latini in ea sententia fuisse videntur vt existimauerint in legitima solemni celebratione Corporis sanguinis Domini et Adminiratione quae in Ecclesia fideli populo è sacra mensa fit Duplicem sâ—…ciem panis vini esse adhibendam atque hunc morem per vniuersas Orientis Occidentis Ecclesias antiquitus obseruatum fuisse tum expriscorum Patrum Monumentis tum ex vetustis diuinorum mysteriorum formulis apparet Et post Ad hoc inductifuerunt exemplo mandato Christi qui instituendo huius Sacramenti vsum Apostolis fiâ—…lium Sacramenta percipientium personam repraesentantibus quibus dixerat Accipite edite idem mox dixit bibite ex hoc omnes quod ex veterum sententia interpretatur Radbertus tam ministri quà m reliqui credentes All the Ancients both Greeke and Latine seeme to be of opinion that in the lawfull and solemne celebration of the Sacrament of Christs body and blood and administring it to the people that both kinds to wit bread and wine ought to be vsed at the Lords Table And it appeares both out of the workes of the ancient Fathers and the old Rites and formes of the diuine mysteries that this custome was obserued in all the Easterne and Westerne Churches And a little after Hereunto they were induced by the Example and Command of Christ who in the institution of this Sacrament speaking to his Apostles then representing the persons of all faithful Communicants said Take and eate and presently after said to the selfe-same Drinke ye all of this which Radbertus according to the mind of the Ancients expoundeth as well Ministers as other beleeuers FINIS A RELATION OF WHAT PASSED IN A CONFERENCE BETWEENE DAN FEATLY Doctor in Diuinity and Mr. Euerard Priest of the Romish Church disguized in the habit of a Lay-Gentleman vnexpectedly met at a Dinner in Noble street Ian. 25. 1626. LONDON Printed by F. Kyngston for Rob. Milbourne and are to be sold at the Greyhound in Pauls Churchyard 1630. THE SPECIALL POINTS of the Conference OF the necessitie of Episcopall gouernment to the essence of a Church 2 Of ordination by Presbyters 3 Of the distinction of Bishops and Priests iure diuino 4 Of differences among Papists in matter of faith 5 Of the immaculate conception of the Virgin Mary 6 Of the authoritie of a Generall Councell aboue the Pope 7 Of prayer for the dead 8 Of the authority of the originall Scriptures and corruption in the vulgar translation 9 Of the Communion in one kind 1. The state of the question opened 2. The necessitie of communicating in both kinds 3. Popish obiections answered 10 Of the Popes supremacie 11 Of mingling water with wine in the Sacrament 12 Of the perfection of Scripture THE CONFERENCE L. F. I Pray you Doctor Featly resolue mee whether thinke you a Church may be without a Bishop or no D. Featly Your L. propoundeth a question that little concerneth you any way or any member of the Church of England For in England we haue God bee blessed Bishops and those besides many learned Priests very well able to iustifie that Calling If I might bee so bold I would aduise your L. not to trouble your selfe with such curious questions of small or no moment to you wherein learned men without hazarding of their saluation may haue different opinions L. F. I hold it a matter of great moment and desire you not to decline it but plainely to deliuer your iudgement thereof D. Featly I professe Madame with submission to more learned iudgements that I euer held and doe hold that a Church cannot bee without a Priest or a Pastor but it may bee and sometimes is without a Bishop properly so called The Church of Geneua as also the Reformed Churches in France and the Low-Countries and diuers in Germany are true Reformed Churches and yet they haue no Bishops such as you meane Although some of them would after our manner haue them if they could Discipline or a precise gouernment of the Church is not simply of the essence of the Church And therefore albeit it be granted that these Churches haue not the best gouernment nor the Apostolicall discipline in all points yet because they haue the Apostolicall doctrine sincerely taught and beleeued in them and the Christian Sacraments rightly administred I beleeue that they are true Churches L. F. Ought there not to bee Bishops in euery Church by the Law of God D. Featly What if there ought This doth not proue that in case there be no Bishops in some Countries as there ought to be that therefore there are no Churches I say that by the Law of God congregations ought to meet in publike Churches to serue God in his House yet if the vse of publike Churches bee taken away from the faithfull or they be not permitted to resort vnto them as in time of persecution it hath been and in some places is at this day the Pastors and their flocks may meete in Cryptis that is in priuate and secret places as they did in the Primitiue Church And the faithfull thus meeting continue a true Church though they haue neither a Temple allowed them nor Tythe to the Ministers nor
you to eate his flesh and drinke his blood and he no where commands you to drinke his flesh and bones Who euer heard of flesh and bones to be drunke and that properly without any figure M. Euerard In Mummie the flesh of man may be drunke D. Featly Peraduenture the flesh of man may bee so handled and altered and the bones also grounded to so small a powder that in some Liquor they may be drunke but the flesh of man and bones without an alteration of qualitie or quantitie cannot be drunke And I hope you will not say that the flesh and bones of Christ in the Sacrament receiue any alteration at all At these words Doctor Featly and Master Euerard were intreated to desist from any further dispute till after supper And so this point was not further pursued After supper Doctor Featly calling for Saint Cyprian besides the places aboue alleaged for Communion in both kinds shewed Master Euerard the speach of Saint Cyprian in the Councell of Carthage Wherein he expresly denieth the Bishop of Romes Supremacy The words are these Super est vt de hac ipsa re quid singuli sentiamus proferamus neminem iudicantes aut à iure communionis aliquem si diuersum senserit remouentes neque enim quisquam nostrum Episcopum se esse Episcoporū constituit aut tyrannico terrore ad obsequendi necessitatem collegas suos adigit Quando habeat omnis episcopus pro licentia libertatis potestatis sua arbitriū propriū tanquā iudicari ab alio non possit cum nec ipse possit alterū iudicare Sed expectemus vniuersi iudicium Domini nostri Iesu Christi qui vnus solus habet potestatē praeponendi nos in Ecclesiae suae gubernatione de hoc actu nostro iudicandi i. e. It remaineth that euery one of vs deliuer his opinion of this matter iudging no man or remouing him from Communion with vs if he differ frō vs in iudgment For none of vs makes himselfe a Bishop of Bishops nor compells by tyrannicall terror his Colleagues to a necessitie of following him seeing that euery Bishop within his liberty and iurisdiction hath free power of himselfe and as he can iudge no other so neither can he be iudged by any other But let vs all waite for the iudgment of our Lord Iesus Christ who onely and alone hath power to preferre vs in the gouernment of his Church and to iudge of this act of ours M. Euerard Saint Cyprian speakes this in a Councell that is condemned by the Church for defining an error to wit that those that were baptized by heretikes ought to be rebaptized Secondly Saint Cyprian in these words Christ one and alone excludeth not his Vicar generall the Bishop of Rome D. Featly Your first exception is not to the purpose For albeit the sentence of this Councell be not approued touching the rebaptization of those who had been baptized by heretikes yet this speech of Saint Cyprian vttered by him at the first meeting of the Bishop of Carthage sitting in Councell was neuer disliked by any of the ancients Neither S. Augustine nor any other Father who impugned the sentence of this Councell did any way impeach or dislike much lesse refute this sentence of Saint Cyprian wherein he denieth all manner of submission to Stephen then Bishop of Rome Nay by a Sarcasme he glance that him and checketh him for making himselfe a Bishop of Bishops and goeing about to compel other Bishops to subscribe to his iudgement Your second answer is controwled by the direct words of Saint Cyprian If any besides Christ to wit his supposed Vicar the Bishop of Rome haue powre to place Bishops in the Church and censure their Synodical Acts then it is false which Saint Cyprian heere saith that Christus vnus solus that Christ alone hath this power The Pope with Christ is not Christus vnus much lesse Christus solus But Saint Cyprian saith Christus vnus solus one and onely Christ hath this power therefore not the Pope Lady Faulkland If Christ alone haue power to preferre Bishops in the gouernment of the Church and to censure their acts made in their Councells how can you then maintaine the Kings Supremacy doth not the King place and displace Bishops D. Featly In Saint Cyprians time there were no Christian Kings or Emperors and therefore this exception could not bee taken against the blessed Martyrs words Secondly That which Saint Cyprian here reproueth in Pope Stephen no Christian King or Emperor assumed to himselfe to be a Bishop of all Bishops and to censure the acts of Bishops and their determinations deliuered in point of Faith in Councels lawfully assembled Thirdly Christian Kings within there owne Dominions grant Conge de-lires to Deanes and Chapters and confirme their Elections and giue Mandates to Metrapolitans to consecrate but they take not vpon them to bee Bishops of all Bishops through the world as the Bishop of Rome doth nor as Bishops or Archbishops to consecrate any Bishops but vpon persons ordained and to bee consecrated by order of the Church they conferre and collate such Bishopricks as lye within there owne dominion M. Euerard Before I answer you any further I require you to answer a place of Cyprian touching the mingling of water with the wine in the Sacrament Mingling the Cup of Christ let vs not depart from the diuine Mandate If any man offer wine onely Christs blood begins to be without vs if water be alone the people begin to be without Christ. When both are mingled then the spirituall and heauenly Sacrament is perfect D. Featly It doth not appeare by scripture that Christ or his Apostles mingled water with wine onely because it was the manner of those hot Countries to temper their wine with water many of the ancients and amongst them Saint Cyprian conceiued that Christ at his last Supper did so Which if he did yet seing he commandeth vs not to follow his example any further then to doe that which hee did that is to take bread and breake it to take the Cup and distribute it we transgresse not Christs Institution whether we communicate in leauen or vnleauened bread whether in pure wine or in wine mingled with water The commandement lyes vpon the substance to eate of the bread and drinke of the Cup and therein of the fruit of the vine but not on the circumstances which are left free and indifferent Secondly Saint Cyprian in this epistle mainly bendeth this discourse against the Aquarij certaine heretikes who contended that the Sacrament ought to be receiued in water onely Against these he proues most strongly that we ought to receiue in wine This is his maine drift and thus farre we hold with him On the by he speaketh of mingling wine with water which was the vse in his time and we dislike it not only wee hold the Church is free in this kind to receiue it in pure
wine as it is the maner of some Protestant Churches or in wine mingled with water as it may bee in some other But Master Euerard if you had read this epistle vpon which you so much insist you might haue found that though Saint Cyprian by the way fauoureth your practise of mingling wine with water yet he condemneth your Church by the maine scope drift of the epistle in the very point now in question For hee saith that Christ taught that the Cup ought to be sanctified and ministred vnto the people which you doe not In sanctifying the Lords Cup and ministring it to the people why do some through ignorance or simplicitie not that which Iesus Christ our Lord and God the author and teacher of this Sacrifice both did and taught By this time it grew very late and so the Conference brake vp This is a true Relation of the some of the Conference so farre as I can remember Most of the answers of Master Euerard are taken verbatim out of the notes set downe by consent in the Conference which I haue to shew The arguments I perfectly remember were these aboue written If Master Euerard thinke good to adde any thing to his arguments or answer I freely giue him leaue and desire him so to do that we may haue a perfect copie An appendix to the former Conference Vntruths vttered by Master Euerard HEe saith it is the doctrine of the Romane Catholikes generally that the people are not bound to receiue the Communion in bread determinately but that they may if the Church please so to appoint receiue it in wine onely On the contrary see Bellarmine li. 4. de sac Euch. 6. 25. Although Christ did not giue bread to the Laietie yet he did not forbid it to be giuen them and elsewhere hee commanded it to bee giuen them And Bellarmine saith a little after S. Luke after the Sacrament giuen vnder the forme of bread addeth Doe this but he repeateth it not after the giuing of the Cup that we might vnderstand that our Lord commanded that the Sacrament should bee giuen vnder the forme of bread to all but not vnder the forme of wine Againe Fisher in his answer to certaine questions propounded by King Iames contradicts directly this assertion of Master Euerard touching Communion in both kinds Sect. 4. This precept doe this being the onely precept giuen by Christ to his Church and giuen absolutely of the forme of bread conditionally of the forme of wine there is no colour to accuse the Church of doing against this Precept Secondly When offer was made vnto him to proue euery point of the Protestants beliefe out of Scripture and he was required to do the like he answered that it was the custome of all heretikes to appeale to sole Scripture and reiect Tradition Vntruth For Irenaeus lib. 3. cap. 2. thus writeth Heretikes when they are conuinced out of Scriptures fall accusing the Scriptures themselues as if they were not right nor of authoritie and that they are ambiguous and that the truth cannot bee knowne out of them by those who are ignorant of tradition for that the truth was not deliuered by writing but by word of mouth Tertul. de praescrip aduers. haeret cap. 17. To conferre by scripture will auaile nothing with this kind of heretikes vnlesse a man goe about to ouer-turne his braine or his stomacke c. And c. 23. They beleeue without Scripture that they may beleeue against Scripture Et de resurrect carnis cap. 47. he calleth heretikes flyers or shunners of the light of the Scriptures qualiter accipiunt lucifugae isti scripturarum And against Hermogenes cap. 22. hee appealeth to sole Scriptures I reuerence the fulnesse of Scripture let Hermogenes Shop or Schoole teach that this is written If it bee not written let him feare that woe or curse threatned to all that adde or take away Thirdly He affirmeth that the Councell of Constance was not confirmed by Martin the fifth in all points defined in that Councell but onely in those that concerned Wicklife Hus and the Bohemians Vntruth In the Acts of the Councell of Constance set out by Binnius sess 45. we reade Our most holy Lord the Pope Martin the fifth said I will vnuiolably obserue all and euery of these things that are determined concluded and agreed in matter of Faith by this present Councell and those things so done Councell-wise or in a Councell-way I approue and ratifie And Binnius testifieth as much p. 960 that the Pope gaue order for the dismissing of the Councell after hee had approued and confirmed all and euery Decree that concerned matter of Faith and is not the Popes supremacy with you a matter of Faith Fourthly he peremptorily denied that the Church of Rome euer prayed for the soules of the Saints in heauen or in particular that she praied for the soule of blessed Leo. Vntruth for Innocentius the third Cap. cum Mathae extra de celebratione Missar This prayer was vsed vpon Saint Leos feast Grant wee beseech thee O Lord that this oblation may profit or helpe the soule of blessed Leo. And although saith Bellarmine this prayer be now changed yet at this day in the seuered prayer or collect for this Feast we say let the yeerely solemnitie of Saint Leo the Confessor and Bishop make vs acceptable vnto thee that by these pious offices of appeasing thee a blessed retribution or reward may accompany him and hee may procure vnto vs gifts of thy grace Bellarmine addeth a little after Pope Innocentius answers to these and the like prayers two manner of wayes when the Church desireth glory to Saints who already possesse the Kingdome of Heauen he desireth or prayeth not that the Saints may increase in glory but that their glory may increase with vs that is that it may be made manifest to the wholeworld Secondly He saith that it seemes not absurd to pray for the encrease of some accidentall glory vnto them He addeth in the third place that peraduenture in these prayers we pray for the glory of the body which they shall haue in the day of the resurrection FINIS A CHALLENGE TO MASTER IOHN FISHER alias PERCIF ahas STEPDEN Iesuite FIrst whereas you Master Iohn Fisher sent questions by way of challenge to Doct White now L. Bishop of Norwich and to mee Iune 21. 1623. concerning the visibilitie of Protestant Professors in all Ages whereupon we returned you this answer viz. Although diuine infallible Faith is not built vpon deduction out of humane History but vpon diuine reuelation as is confessed by your owne Schoolemen and expresly by Cardinall Bellarmine Historiae humanae faciunt tantùm fidem humanam cui subesse potest falsum Humane histories and Records beget onely an humane Faith or rather credulitie subiect to error not a diuine and infallible beliefe which must be built vpon surer ground Secondly although I say this question of visibility are
quantum ad primas sessiones reprobatum est in Concil Florent Lateranensi In Hierarchiâ—… k k Huius Concilij nihil est ratum probatum nisi quaedam dispositiones circa beneficia Cor. cil verò ipsum reprobatur in Concil Lateran sess 11. l Vasq. in 3. part Thom. quest 80. art 12. disp 215 cap. 3. Basiliense Concil nullius est auctoritatis in hac re m m Bellar. de sacram Euchar. lib. 4. c. 24. Answ. I. n n Omni hebdomada offerendum est si non quotidie perigrinis incolis tamen velbis in bebdomada o o Iob. Munster à vertleg discurs ea nobilis p p Anno 404. Annal. tom 4. Hic lector considera quà m procul abborreant à patrum traditione vsuque Catholicae Ecclesiae qui nostro tempore negant osseruandam esse sacratissimam Eucharistiam quam videmus non sub specie panis tantùm sed etiam sub specie vini olim consueuisse recondi q q Bellar. de sa Euch. lib. 4. cap. 24. Stromatum 1. p Hard. diuis 19. art 2. Answ. 1. q q Aust. contra Parm. l. 3. Pensandae sunt doctrinae non in statera dolosa consuetudinum suarum sed in statera aequa diuinarum scripturarum r r Concil Caesar Aug. â—…an 3. Eucharistiae gratiam si quis probatur acceptam non consumpsisse in Ecclesia anathema fit imperpetuum 2 t t Iust. in apol 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 u u Nazia in fune Gorgoniae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. x x Hier. epist. ad Rust. Nihil illo ditius qui corpus domini in canistro sanguinem portabat in vitro * * Bellar. desacr Eucha lib. 4. c. 24. Answ. I. x x Nec derelicto cibo poculo Domini y y Quando carnem Christi man ducauerunt vel non manducauerunt quando biberunt vel non biberunt sanguinem c 8. z z Gen. lib. de Eccles. dogmat cap. 52. Si paruuli sunt vel hebetes respondeant pro illis qui illos afferunt ita Eucharistiae mysterijs admittantur * * Bellar. loc supr citato Answ. 1. a a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 b b Euseb. Eccles. hist. l. 6. c. 36. c c Bed hist. lib. 4. d d Bellar. loc sup cit Answ. 1. e e Concil Tolotan 4. Can. 17. In Choro Clerus communicet extra chorum populus f f Sola species panis dabatur in manus ex calice autem bibebant qui volebant in Ecclesia sed non licebat laicis calicem tangere g g Annal. tom 1. an Christi 57. Fideles sacrificij tempore olim in Ecclesia sacratissimam Eucharistiam sub vtraque specie panis vini sumebant h h Bellar. loc sup cit Answ. 1. 2 i i Lyturg. praesanctif 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Answer to certaine questions Sect. 5. l l Sozomen Eccles hist. lib. 1. m m Fisher in his answer to certaine questions propounded by King Iames his Maiestie Point 7. Answ. 1. n n Alexand. Hal. 3. paâ—…t q. 11. membr 2. art 4. Corpus non est sacramentaliter sub specie viâ—…i nec sanguis sacramentaliter sub specie panis Ergo vt sacramentaliter sumatur totus Christus necesse est vt sumatur sub duabus speciebus Vid. supra Arg. 2. o o Bell. de sacra Euch. lib. 4. c. 24. Answ. 1. 2 p p Bel. loco supracitat species panis vini non tam essentiales quam integrales partes huiuâ—… sacramenti videntur Answ. 1. q q Ambr. in 1. ad Corinth cap. 11. Indignus est Domino qui aliter mysterium celebrat quà m ab eo traditum est r r Halensis part 3. qu. 11. membro artic 4. sumptio sub vtraque specie minoris est efficaciae complementi Vasquez in 3. Tho. q. 80. art 12. probabilior sententia mihi semper visa est maiorem fructum gratiae ex vtraque specie huius sacramenti quà m ex altera tantùm percipi Ita docet Halensis Gasper Consaluus quam sententiam absolutè secutus est Clemens sextus in Bulla ad Regem Angliae Anno 1346. quâ illi concessit vt ad gratiae augmentum in vtraque specie communicaret Aegidius de Coninck Iesuita Etsi plus gratiae conferat sumptio vtriusque speciei dicimus tamen meritò hoc Ecclesiam non curare quaest 10. art 12. in lib. 4. sent r r De leg Senat consult t t Hier. in Catal. Viror illust Answ. 1. 2 3 4 * * Art 2. diuis 5. x x In Luc. 24. vers 30. 31. y y Gers. defens decret con Constant. z z Confess Polonica * * Tom. 9. tract 35 * * Bell. de sacra Eucha l. 4. c. 24. Melanth Orat. a a Sess. 13. b b In Can. Missae tract 7. c c Quest. 74. part 3. art 2 d d De Cons. dis e e in 1. Cor. c. 11. f f Consil. de Commu sub vtraque specis g g Delegit vsu Eucha cap. 10. h h Disp. 216. c. 4. i i Hist. Bohe. k k Lit. mis Hist. Concil Trid. l l Loâ—… sup cit m m Tap. Consonum est institutioni sacramenti integritati imò exemplo Christi patruÌ„ primitiu Eccles. vt populus communicaret sub vtraque specie citat Cassand tract de commu sub vtraque specie n n 4. part quest 53. memb 1. k Gen 44. 12. l l Psal. 16. 13. a a Hieron aduersus Lucifer Ecclesia non est quae sacerdotem non habet I meane a compleate Church For in some sense that of Tertullian is true Where two or three are there is a Church although they be Laicks Tertul. exhort ad cast b See P. Moul. Bucklet of faith P. Mart. epist. ad Iuel episcop Salisb Zanch ad Grind. Archiep. Bucer Gualterum Item Bezam Suadael ad Epis. copos quosdam Angliae b b Lib. 4. de bapt contra Don. c. 1. 18. tract in Ioh. 124 Ecclesia claues ab â—…oregni coeloruÌ„ accepit in Petro. c c D. Field of the Church lib. 3. c. 239. pag. 156. Presbyters as they may doe all other acts whatsoeuer speciall challenge Bishops in ordinary course make vnto them so they may doe this also Who dare condemne all those worthy Ministers of God that were ordained by Presbyters in sundry Churches of the world at such time as Bishops in those places where they liued opposed themselues against the truth of God He citeth there Armacanus and Alex of Hales affirming that many learned men of their time were of this opinion that Presbyters in case of necessity may ordaine e Quid est enim episcopus nisi primus presbyter denique non aliter quà m cum presbyteros consacerdotes vocat nunquid ministros condiaconos suos dicit episcopus non vtique quia multò inferiores sunt â—…rpe est ludicem dicere Primicerium nam
Alexandriae per totam Aegyptum siâ—…desit Episcopus consecrat Presbyter August ex vtroque Test. mixt quaest 101. D. Mort. Apol. Cathole 21. Presbyter alter alteram ordinare potest non in Ecclesia bene composita sed in statu collapso deplorato maximè in casu necessitatis * * False vid. Vntruth 3. in the Appendix to this Conference * * Infrain Appendice D. Field of the Church lib. 3. cap. 29. Howsoeuer we dislike the Popish manner of praying for the dead which is to deliuer them out of their feigned Purgatory yet wee doe not reprehend the Primitiue Church nor the Pastors nor guides of it for naming them in their publike prayers thereby to nourish their hope of the resurrection and to expresse their longing desire of the consummation of their owne and their happinesse that are come before them in the faith of Christ. * * See the place of Bellarmine cited in the Appendix g Can. 6. Si quis dixerit in Ecclesia cathol Non esse Hierarchiam diuinâ ordinatione constitutam quae constat ex Episcopis presbyteris ministris anathema sit Can. 7. Si quis dixerit Episco pos presbyteris non esse superiores anathemasit See the history of the Councell of Trent lib. 7. p. 478. 480 The Legates consulting among themselues answer that there were cause to declare that a Bishop is superiour to a Priest verum quo iure declarato non esse opus But by what right the Councell need not determine A little after the Doctors in the Councel were diuided about the Hierarchy some placing it in Orders only naming the Orders of Deacons Priests and Bishops and others following For Aerius placed it in iurisdiction a third sort placed it in both and the reasons of their direct opinions are there to be seene The contrary to this assertion is maintained by the learned in the Romish Church vid. Pagn In praef in suam ver sionem Ariam Montanum praef Bibl. Reg. Ignatium Leuitam contra Lindanum alios Pontificios prae omnibus Hieron apologiam pro Hebraicâ Veritate in Prologis Comm. in Zach. cap. 8. vid. Decret 1. part dist 9. ca. vt veteres citat Bellar. plures alios in hanc sententiam de verbo Dei lib. 2. cap. 11. 10. Benedict Parisiensis theologus aliquot millia locorum in lat vulg versione correxit ad veritatem hebraicam graecam edit Paris an 1552. 1558. sed postea prodijt noua editio ibid. 1573. omissis omnibus illis emendationibus cui praefixa est satis insulsa praefatio Iacobi fabri Sorbonici D. h h Certe vix dubitari potest quin sicut Latina Ecclesia constantior fuit in fide retinenda quà m Graecaâ—…ita etiam vigilantior fuerit in suis codicibus à corruptione defendendis Bell. de Verb. Deil. 2. c. 11. h h This Bellarmine must needs say vnlesse he contradict himselfe For a little after in the same chapter he confessâ—…th that in foure cases we may correct and mend the vulgar Latine Translation by the Greeke and Hebrew Fountaines De Verb. Dei lib. 2. cap. 11. sect 17. See Hieron Apolog. ad Pam. Interpretum vâ—…tio quae apud suos purissâ—…o orationis cursu labuntur apud nos vitijs scateâ—…t â—…dem cont Heluid cap. 6. Multo purior manare credenda est sontis vnda quà m riui * * In hunc locum Ignat. exceptioni Bellarm. primae An Ignatius hoc loco corruptus item secundae ac tertiae Item Baronij deprauationi fraudi respondet Nic. Vedelius exercit 2. in epist. ad Philadelph Morn de Eucharist lib. 1. c. 10. 11. vbi de hoc toto argum agit plenissimè k k Quomodo ad Martyrij poculuÌ„ idoneos faciemus si non eos primùm in Ecclesia ad Bibendum poculum Domini iure communicationis admittimus Cypr. epist. 54. ad Cornet l l Cur quidam in calice sanctificando plebi ministrando non faciunt quod Dom fecit docuit m m Ad bibendum sanguinem omnes exhortantur qui volunt habere vitam n n Aut integra sacramenta percipiant aut ab integris arceantur Quia diuisio vnius eius demque mysterij sine grandi sacrilegio non potest prouenire o o Quid sit sanguis non iam audiendo sed bibendo didicistis p p Sanguis non in manus fidelium sed in ora funditur These books of Gregory are cited by Papists against vs vnder his name though they be iustly suspected to be counte feit in learned Diuines iudgement * * See an answer to these pretended ancient Rites supra c. 14. l l It is now two yeeres and more since Master Euerard hath had this Scedule in his hand vnto which he hath been sundry times importuned to answer but hath not performed * * M. Euerard should haue taken notice that the Apostles were not at this time fully ordained Priests though they had been once sent to preach For after his resurrection Ioh. 20. Christ breathed on them the holy Ghost and said Whose soeuer sinnes yee remit c. whereby hee fully indued them with Priestly power Secondly the Apostles at this Supper were Communicants not Ministers of the Sacrament Christ was then the Priest and Minister onely in that action and therefore the Apostles supplying the place of meere Communicants it followeth that whatsoeuer Christ then commanded them he commanded all Receiuers after them * * If neither precept of eating or drinking belong to the Laiety the Laiety are not at all bound to receiue this Sacrament * * Shamefull vntruth and notorious ignorance See the Appendix num 〈◊〉 item Chamierum de Euch. lib. 8. cap. 〈◊〉 de panis distributione quaestio nulla est nec dubitatur omnibus esse fidelibus distribuendum si qui se bene praeparatos offerant * * Waldensis tom 2. cap. 91. fol. 162. edit Salmant 1557. Prolixe probat ex August Cypriano Bernando bibere spiritualitur intelligendum Caietanusin 3. partem Thom. q. 80. verba Christi Ioh. 6. ad literam intelliguntur ad Manducationem spiritualem * * This answer he contradicteth in his last answer infra vid. A. * * From the proper acception of the obiect onely and not the act the corporall and substantiall presence of Christ in the Sacrament cannot be inferred For spiritually and figuratiuely a man may feed vpon Christs body by faith though his body be not present on earth * * See this answer refelled by Vasquez tom 3. in 3. partem disp 116. Nisi manducaueritis c. Haec verba non tantum reseruntur ad rem ipsam sumptam sed ad modum sumendi cam nam manducate bibite si verba propriè vsurâ—…entur cuiuis speciei conuenire non possunt Neque enim sanguis sub specie panis bibi dicitur sicut neque corpus sub specie vinimanducari vt optimè